PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security Exclusive: Security officials on the ground in Libya challenge CIA account


petegz28
11-03-2012, 08:00 PM
Despite a carefully narrated version of events rolled out late this week by the CIA claiming agents jumped into action as soon as they were notified of calls for help in Benghazi, security officials on the ground say calls for help went out considerably earlier -- and signs of an attack were mounting even before that.

The accounts, from foreign and American security officials in and around Benghazi at the time of the attack, indicate there was in fact a significant lag between when the threat started to show itself and help started to arrive.

According to the CIA, the first calls for assistance came at 9:40 p.m. local time from a senior State Department official at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, to the CIA annex about a mile away.

But according to multiple people on the ground that night, the Blue Mountain Security manager, who was in charge of the local force hired to guard the consulate perimeter, made calls on both two-way radios and cell phones to colleagues in Benghazi warning of problems at least an hour earlier. Those calls allegedly went to local security contractors who say that the CIA annex was also notified much earlier than 9:40 p.m. U.S. military intelligence also told Fox News that armed militia was gathering up to three hours before the attack began.

One source said the Blue Mountain Security chief seemed "distraught" and said "the situation here is very serious, we have a problem." He also said that even without these phone and radio calls, it was clear to everyone in the security community on the ground in Benghazi much earlier than 9:40 p.m. that fighters were gathering in preparation for an attack.

Many of these security contractors and intelligence sources on the ground in Benghazi met twice a week for informal meetings at the consulate with Blue Mountain and consulate staff, and at times other international officials. They were all very familiar with security at the consulate -- and said the staff seemed "complacent" and "didn't seem to follow the normal American way of securing a facility."

Both American and British sources say multiple roadblocks set up by fighters believed to be with Ansar al-Sharia were in place in Benghazi several hours before the 9:40 p.m. timeline and that communications also alluded to "heavily armed troops showing up with artillery." Fox News was told by both American and British contacts who were in Benghazi that night that the CIA timeline rolled out this past week is only "loosely based on the truth" and "doesn't quite add up."

Fox News was also told that the local guard force meant to protect the consulate perimeter "panicked" and didn't know what to do as the attackers took up positions. Sources say other guards simply "walked away".

One former Special Op now employed by a private company in Benghazi said that even the safe room wasn't properly set up. He said "the safe room is one of the first measures you take" and that he is "not sure how you can set a safe room without fire suppression and ventilation in case of fire." He also said, "Ambassador Stevens would likely be alive today if this simple and normal procedure was put into place."

As details emerge of serious security issues before the attack on Sept. 11, Fox News is also beginning to hear more frustration from sources both on the ground in Benghazi and in the U.S. Multiple British and American sources insist there were other capabilities in the region and are mystified why none were used. Fox News was told there were not only armed drones that monitor Libyan chemical weapon sites in the area, but also F-18's, AC-130 aircraft and even helicopters that could have been dispatched in a timely fashion.

British intelligence sources said that unarmed drones routinely flew over Benghazi every night in flight patterns and that armed drones which fly over chemical sites, some a short flight from Benghazi, "were always said to be on call." American sources confirmed this and questioned "why was a drone armed only with a camera dispatched?"

Another source added, "Why would they put a ragtag team together in Tripoli as first responders? This is not even what they do for a living. We had a first responder air base in Italy almost the same distance away." Despite the team arriving from Tripoli that night, sources said sufficient American back-up never came.

British sources on the ground in Benghazi said they are extremely frustrated by the attack and are still wondering why they weren't called for help. “We have more people on the ground here than the Americans and I just don't know why we didn't get the call?" one said.

Both American and British sources said, at the very least, the security situation on the ground and the lack of proper response were the result of "complete incompetence." The covert team that came in from Tripoli was held up at the Benghazi airport for more than three hours by Libyan officials. Sources said the team notified officials in Washington that they were being delayed within 30 minutes of their arrival.

They also point out that these questions "don't even address the military capabilities of our United Nations ally Turkey, who (has) forces available a similarly short flight away." Fox News has learned that Turkey had a number of embassy staff in town the night of the attack and that the Turkish consul general met with Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi the night he and the three other Americans were killed.

One source asked, "Were the Turks not warned? What forces were available from our ally Turkey? Especially since they had officials there in Benghazi also and had to be concerned … and where was the U.N. in all of this?"


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/03/exclusive-security-officials-on-ground-in-libya-challenge-cia-account/#ixzz2BDP0oTTx

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=1942924482001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:06 PM
FOX News...72 hours before the election....another Hail Mary!

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:09 PM
Imagine that.

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:09 PM
FOX News...72 hours before the election....another Hail Mary!

nobody cares /libs

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:10 PM
Imagine that.

And RWNJs believe it to be the Holy Grail. Imagine that...

stevieray
11-03-2012, 08:11 PM
RWNJs

imagine that

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:11 PM
And RWNJs believe it to be the Holy Grail. Imagine that...

I can't speak for RWNJ's. I'm not one of them. I'm just an ex-Navy guy that knows that the excuses for not sending help were bullshit.

stonedstooge
11-03-2012, 08:13 PM
I find their account more believable than the smoke O'Bama tried to blow up my ass for 2 weeks

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:14 PM
I can't speak for RWNJ's. I'm not one of them. I'm just an ex-Navy guy that knows that the excuses for not sending help were bullshit.

In this election...you've shown your hand. No need to make excuses. Wear it proudly.

cosmo20002
11-03-2012, 08:18 PM
Hey, I thought Obama was going to use his dictator powers to cancel the election. Will he announce that Sunday or Monday?

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 08:23 PM
In this election...you've shown your hand. No need to make excuses. Wear it proudly.

My Brother just returned recently from there serving under General Ham and he backs what listopencil and LVNHACK have been saying. You liberals are pretty pathetic.

TGI

petegz28
11-03-2012, 08:23 PM
You know, I love how Kotter and Cosmo just instantly jump to "RWNJ" and election BS.

If anything the two of you have proved Libs simply don't give a shit about Libya because they can't blame Bush.

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:26 PM
My Brother just returned recently from there serving under General Ham and he backs what listopencil and LVNHACK have been saying. You liberals are pretty pathetic.

TGI

My sister-in-law is married to the CIA agent who's heading up the investigation, and her husband says RWNJs are attempting to distort events for politcal gain. Imagine that. You Cons are pretty predictable and pathetic. And un-Patriotic, really.

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:26 PM
In this election...you've shown your hand. No need to make excuses. Wear it proudly.

Yes, I have shown my hand. It's got a middle finger extended to people who abuse power and neglect their duty. Regardless of party. Regardless of position.

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:27 PM
My sister-in-law is married to the CIA agent who's heading up the investigation, and her husband says RWNJs are attempting to distort events for politcal gain. Imagine that. You Cons are pretty predictable and pathetic. And un-Patriotic, really.

Maybe someday he'll be able to tell you what he finds out. Meanwhile...you've got nothing.

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 08:27 PM
My sister-in-law is married to the CIA agent who's heading up the investigation, and her husband says RWNJs are attempting to distort events for politcal gain. Imagine that. You Cons are pretty predictable and pathetic. And un-Patriotic, really.

You got to be posting drunk again because you are really being stupid. I can't believe you are a teacher and act so childish.

TGI

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:28 PM
Yes, I have shown my hand. It's got a middle finger extended to people who abuse power and neglect their duty. Regardless of party. Regardless of position.

The only thing worse than ideologues, are ideologues who pretend to be "moderate." Congrats.

J Diddy
11-03-2012, 08:28 PM
My Brother just returned recently from there serving under General Ham and he backs what listopencil and LVNHACK have been saying. You liberals are pretty pathetic.

TGI

With all due respect, nobody knows your brother or General Ham, so I wouldn't be too upset if nobody just accepted their word as truth based on that alone. All they are to us is names. Everybody's mama gave them one.

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:29 PM
You got to be posting drunk again because you are really being stupid. I can't believe you are a teacher and act so childish.

TGI

I am serious (and drinking grape crystal light, at the moment....thanks.) Sorry you can't accept that. Dead serious.

Maybe someday he'll be able to tell you what he finds out. Meanwhile...you've got nothing.

Which is precisely what TGI ("The Gay Ignoramus"-nttawwt?) brings to this....

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 08:30 PM
With all due respect, nobody knows your brother or General Ham, so I wouldn't be too upset if nobody just accepted their word as truth based on that alone. All they are to us is names. Everybody's mama gave them one.

I suggest catching up to what has been discovered then with all due respect. There are some great summaries in some of the other threads.

TGI

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 08:32 PM
I am serious (and drinking grape crystal light, at the moment....thanks.) Sorry you can't accept that. Dead serious.

Childish, but you act like that here all the time.

TGI

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:34 PM
Childish, but you act like that here all the time.

TGI

Answering douchebaggery with petulance is a talent. Ignorant redneck RWNJ types don't understand petulance. Sorry about that.

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 08:37 PM
Answering douchebaggery with petulance is a talent. Ignorant redneck RWNJ types don't understand petulance. Sorry about that.

No your not, you're just another arrogant libtard, that happens to teach our children, which is very, very sad really.

TGI

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:40 PM
The only thing worse than ideologues, are ideologues who pretend to be "moderate." Congrats.

So you run the projector for the AV Club, eh?

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:44 PM
Which is precisely what TGI ("The Gay Ignoramus"-nttawwt?) brings to this....

There are a couple of problems with your story. A CIA agent shouldn't be giving anyone info about an ongoing investigation. If he is, he should be removed and debriefed. Also you are making a serious accusation (although unintended) that the guy leading up the investigation is allowing his political beliefs to cause him to enter the process with a substantial bias, in which case he should be removed.

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 08:49 PM
There are a couple of problems with your story. A CIA agent shouldn't be giving anyone info about an ongoing investigation. If he is, he should be removed and debriefed. Also you are making a serious accusation (although unintended) that the guy leading up the investigation is allowing his political beliefs to cause him to enter the process with a substantial bias, in which case he should be removed.

I believed he was making that up just to be an ass. Trust me, my Bro didn't tell me anything that would jeopardize anything other than there should have been help available in some form like you and LVNHACK have been saying. He hopes General Ham is able to tell his story before Congress.

TGI

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:50 PM
There are a couple of problems with your story. A CIA agent shouldn't be giving anyone info about an ongoing investigation. If he is, he should be removed and debriefed. Also you are making a serious accusation (although unintended) that the guy leading up the investigation is allowing his political beliefs to cause him to enter the process with a substantial bias, in which case he should be removed.

I'm sure bias only exists on the side of those with whom you disagree--and never from, FOX or its sources, for example....

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:52 PM
I'm sure bias only exists on the side of those with whom you disagree--and never from, FOX or its sources, for example....

No sparky, you're the one that said he was biased.

listopencil
11-03-2012, 08:53 PM
I believed he was making that up just to be an ass. Trust me, my Bro didn't tell me anything that would jeopardize anything other than there should have been help available in some form like you and LVNHACK have been saying. He hopes General Ham is able to tell his story before Congress.

TGI

I would love to hear it.

Mr. Kotter
11-03-2012, 08:55 PM
I would love to hear it.

Just keep listening to Rush/Beck/Hannity and watching Drudge....I'm sure they'll break the case very, very soon.

cosmo20002
11-03-2012, 09:00 PM
You know, I love how Kotter and Cosmo just instantly jump to "RWNJ" and election BS.

If anything the two of you have proved Libs simply don't give a shit about Libya because they can't blame Bush.

Does giving a shit mean I'm supposed to make up stuff about what happened based on what Sean Hannity says?

listopencil
11-03-2012, 09:01 PM
Just keep listening to Rush/Beck/Hannity and watching Drudge....I'm sure they'll break the case very, very soon.

I've heard of them, never listened to them except small bits and pieces on YouTube for a laugh. What you're failing to realize is that it's your bias that's showing. The situation contains certain elements which a rational human being can critique. In fact, rational people should critique it. It looks more and more like a mess as more info is released. Unless of course you blind yourself with partisanship, which is what you are doing.

listopencil
11-03-2012, 09:02 PM
Does giving a shit mean I'm supposed to make up stuff about what happened based on what Sean Hannity says?

Go back in the gay marriage thread and give stevieray some shit. I've already been around the block with him on that many times.

cosmo20002
11-03-2012, 09:05 PM
My Brother just returned recently from there serving under General Ham and he backs what listopencil and LVNHACK have been saying. You liberals are pretty pathetic.

TGI

So, what you're saying is that like listopencil and hack, your brother has no idea what happened.

listopencil
11-03-2012, 09:07 PM
So, what you're saying is that like listopencil and hack, your brother has no idea what happened.

I hope that if someday you are mugged in front of a police station you will appreciate the help when it arrives.

The_Grand_Illusion
11-03-2012, 09:09 PM
So, what you're saying is that like listopencil and hack, your brother has no idea what happened.

Quit being such an agitator. What gave you away was your "middle of the road" and then constantly spouting Dem talking points and attacking anything that goes against your Dems, lol

I suggest you go back and read some of the summaries that people already tried to explain it to you, and there is plenty of links to back it up, but you are just here to obfuscate, aren't you? I called that out long ago, thank you.

TGI

petegz28
11-03-2012, 09:24 PM
Does giving a shit mean I'm supposed to make up stuff about what happened based on what Sean Hannity says?

Where has anyone posted anything from Hannity?

cosmo20002
11-03-2012, 09:29 PM
Where has anyone posted anything from Hannity?

Where? It's all over here. He's not being quoted, but the stuff I hear him say, I read over here as well. Someone is copying someone. That, or demented minds think alike.

petegz28
11-03-2012, 09:47 PM
Where? It's all over here. He's not being quoted, but the stuff I hear him say, I read over here as well. Someone is copying someone. That, or demented minds think alike.

Oh, ok so stuff you hear him say. So everyone you listen too never repeats reported stories, is that it? It's all orginal thought?

JFC

cosmo20002
11-03-2012, 09:51 PM
Oh, ok so stuff you hear him say. So everyone you listen too never repeats reported stories, is that it? It's all orginal thought?

JFC

It's ok to repeat a reported story. Except that when the story is made-up BS, it tends to make the repeater look like an idiot.

petegz28
11-03-2012, 10:04 PM
It's ok to repeat a reported story. Except that when the story is made-up BS, it tends to make the repeater look like an idiot.

Oh, so now it's all made up BS. Ok....ROFL

petegz28
11-03-2012, 10:05 PM
cosmobama doesn't like the story so it has to be made up. That's just fuckig rich.

LVNHACK
11-03-2012, 11:26 PM
Interesting stuff....More then anything, I have to wonder why DoS went with a small unknown security provider, when they already have a branch of authorized vetted US providers, many trained and waiting to deploy.


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/benghazi-hearing/?utm_source=Contextly&utm_medium=RelatedLinks&utm_campaign=Previous


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/petraeus-benghazi/


The testimony of the Lt. Col stating that security was downgraded for political reasons is damning IMO. But wtf do know, I've only earned my living doing this shit for 5 years.

cosmo20002
11-04-2012, 12:01 AM
Interesting stuff....More then anything, I have to wonder why DoS went with a small unknown security provider, when they already have a branch of authorized vetted US providers, many trained and waiting to deploy.


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/benghazi-hearing/?utm_source=Contextly&utm_medium=RelatedLinks&utm_campaign=Previous


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/petraeus-benghazi/


The testimony of the Lt. Col stating that security was downgraded for political reasons is damning IMO. But wtf do know, I've only earned my living doing this shit for 5 years.

Isn't it true that the CIA was really running this place?

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 12:35 AM
Isn't it true that the CIA was really running this place?


I don't have enough info to have an informed opinion on that...To me, from what I've read, the biggest mistake made was not keeping or even upgrading the security that was in place and then farming the security to a small unknown Brit company....I work for a Brit company, and while some of front line guys (vets of either the wars, or contracting) the management is less then stellar....


Again...MY OPINION.....American Tax dollars should go to American companies and American providers. Where that money comes back to OUR economy not the UK, eastern europe or Africa.

The world loves America's money, they don't love us....

cosmo20002
11-04-2012, 12:38 AM
I don't have enough info to have an informed opinion on that...To me, from what I've read, the biggest mistake made was not keeping or even upgrading the security that was in place and then farming the security to a small unknown Brit company....I work for a Brit company, and while some of front line guys (vets of either the wars, or contracting) the management is less then stellar....


You may want to look into that.

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 01:16 AM
You may want to look into that.


You're a regular jewel aren't you ?

jjjayb
11-04-2012, 08:33 AM
FOX News...72 hours before the election....another Hail Mary!

This "hail mary" isn't needed to beat Obama. He's going to lose anyway.

The_Grand_Illusion
11-04-2012, 09:37 AM
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/confirmed-us-benghazi-seals-had-laser-capability-and-waited-five-hours-for-air-support-but-it-never-came/

CONFIRMED: US Benghazi SEALs Had Laser Capability and Waited Five Hours For Air Support… But It Never Came

Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, November 4, 2012, 8:37 AM



The US SEALs had laser capability and for 5 hours and 15 minutes were wondering when the air support would show up.
But it never came.

Obama never made the order.

Tyrone Woods begged for air support on 9-11 before his death.
It never came.

FOX News reported:

Sources who have debriefed the team that was at the CIA annex the night of the attack in Benghazi say that the CIA operators from the Global Response Staff, or GRS, were equipped with Mark 48 machine guns and had two types of laser capability. Each weapon had both a “passive” as well as a “visible” laser that could be used against the Libyan attackers.

The presence of laser capability on the roof of the CIA annex confirms what Fox News sources that night in Benghazi originally said, which is that they had laser capability and for 5 hours and 15 minutes were wondering where the usual overhead air support was, especially since, according to this source, they radioed from the annex beginning as early as midnight asking for it.

The presence of lasers raises more questions about why air support was not sent to Benghazi even protectively once it became clear that the fighting had followed the CIA rescue team back to the annex.

The heroes on the ground called for help – Obama did nothing.

It Was Dereliction of Duty

The_Grand_Illusion
11-04-2012, 09:40 AM
Fox News will make the libs/dems mad but they are the ones leading on this mess:



You're watching...
Judge Jeanine: Mr. President, your check just bounced


<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=1945508147001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>

The_Grand_Illusion
11-04-2012, 09:42 AM
Col. David Hunt was the one that alerted me to this being a major cluster for this admin after the vice presidential debates:

Justice with Judge Jeanine - November 3, 2012 - Libya Cover-Up

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/mth3Up_Ervs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 10:11 AM
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/confirmed-us-benghazi-seals-had-laser-capability-and-waited-five-hours-for-air-support-but-it-never-came/

CONFIRMED: US Benghazi SEALs Had Laser Capability and Waited Five Hours For Air Support… But It Never Came

Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, November 4, 2012, 8:37 AM



The US SEALs had laser capability and for 5 hours and 15 minutes were wondering when the air support would show up.
But it never came.

Obama never made the order.

Tyrone Woods begged for air support on 9-11 before his death.
It never came.

FOX News reported:

Sources who have debriefed the team that was at the CIA annex the night of the attack in Benghazi say that the CIA operators from the Global Response Staff, or GRS, were equipped with Mark 48 machine guns and had two types of laser capability. Each weapon had both a “passive” as well as a “visible” laser that could be used against the Libyan attackers.

The presence of laser capability on the roof of the CIA annex confirms what Fox News sources that night in Benghazi originally said, which is that they had laser capability and for 5 hours and 15 minutes were wondering where the usual overhead air support was, especially since, according to this source, they radioed from the annex beginning as early as midnight asking for it.

The presence of lasers raises more questions about why air support was not sent to Benghazi even protectively once it became clear that the fighting had followed the CIA rescue team back to the annex.

The heroes on the ground called for help – Obama did nothing.

It Was Dereliction of Duty


Disgusting.....And some here don't care....:grr:

The_Grand_Illusion
11-04-2012, 10:14 AM
Disgusting.....And some here don't care....:grr:

Oh no doubt, they are more worried about holding on to power, including much of the media.

That's why I posted the video with Col. Hunt because they had been marked, an F-16 could have been there in 25 minutes to take out the hostile target.

TGI

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 11:20 AM
Oh no doubt, they are more worried about holding on to power, including much of the media.

That's why I posted the video with Col. Hunt because they had been marked, an F-16 could have been there in 25 minutes to take out the hostile target.

TGI


But Col. Hunt isn't a credible.....:rolleyes:

stevieray
11-04-2012, 11:24 AM
But Col. Hunt isn't a credible.....:rolleyes:

Cindy Sheehan? media orgasm. Mr. Doughtery?...crickets.....

The_Grand_Illusion
11-04-2012, 11:37 AM
But Col. Hunt isn't a credible.....:rolleyes:


And according to Col. Hunt and other military experts, correct me if I'm wrong, the call is the president's to make.

TGI

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 11:54 AM
And according to Col. Hunt and other military experts, correct me if I'm wrong, the call is the president's to make.

TGI

POTUS could delegate it to a lower level...SecDef...Somehow I doubt it...But overall as CiC...He's responsible...

cosmo20002
11-04-2012, 12:06 PM
OK, I'll try to ask a common sense question. I know that probably only the "Obama is a murderer" crowd will answer, but I'll ask anyway.

I've read on here that people at the consulate had weapons. A few posts up I read that they had "lasers," although I'm not exactly sure of the particular siginificance of "lasers." And that Obama or someone else did not give the order to use these weapons.

So, question: If one of our people is under attack, if one of our government buildings is under attack from RPGs, mortars, gunfire, and mean people scaling the gates, is it really necessary to get presidential permission to defend yourself? Someone is firing a rocket at me, but I need a note from Obama to fire at him? This sounds like bullshit, but is the basic story I keep seeing.

cosmo20002
11-04-2012, 12:09 PM
You're a regular jewel aren't you ?

Not sure what you mean by that. I've read that this was really a CIA post and they were largely responsible for running it. A lot of this is coming back to Gen. Patraeus (head of the CIA), who is kind of a right-wing hero.

mlyonsd
11-04-2012, 12:18 PM
OK, I'll try to ask a common sense question. I know that probably only the "Obama is a murderer" crowd will answer, but I'll ask anyway.

I've read on here that people at the consulate had weapons. A few posts up I read that they had "lasers," although I'm not exactly sure of the particular siginificance of "lasers." And that Obama or someone else did not give the order to use these weapons.

So, question: If one of our people is under attack, if one of our government buildings is under attack from RPGs, mortars, gunfire, and mean people scaling the gates, is it really necessary to get presidential permission to defend yourself? Someone is firing a rocket at me, but I need a note from Obama to fire at him? This sounds like bullshit, but is the basic story I keep seeing.I'm assuming lasers to guide smart weapons.

cosmo20002
11-04-2012, 12:24 PM
I'm assuming lasers to guide smart weapons.

Says they had machine guns with "laser capability". So, apparently they aren't allowed to use them against people who are currently attacking their building without first getting permission from Obama? Seems like a BS story to me.

mlyonsd
11-04-2012, 12:35 PM
Says they had machine guns with "laser capability". So, apparently they aren't allowed to use them against people who are currently attacking their building without first getting permission from Obama? Seems like a BS story to me.

If this story is accurate we're both right.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/04/what-laser-capability-did-benghazi-team-have/

ROYC75
11-04-2012, 01:02 PM
Wonder how the Libtards will feel when it comes out that Uncle Obamay is misleading the America people again right up to the election and past it?

Will they want him & Biden impeached, Hillary removed ? Will they admit that Obama was running out the clock?

Nope,turn a blind eye and look the other way.

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 01:17 PM
Says they had machine guns with "laser capability". So, apparently they aren't allowed to use them against people who are currently attacking their building without first getting permission from Obama? Seems like a BS story to me.


It would all depend on what their ROE's (Rule of Engagement) Orders were...And I seriously doubt POTUS had anything to do with those...

cosmo20002
11-04-2012, 01:58 PM
It would all depend on what their ROE's (Rule of Engagement) Orders were...And I seriously doubt POTUS had anything to do with those...

So some ROEs say that when you are being fired upon with RPGs, mortars and guns, that you are not allowed to shoot a gun a the bad guys? Sorry, I have a real hard time believing that.

carlos3652
11-04-2012, 06:36 PM
I thought I heard that the security in place in Libya was "bullet free" - like they were armed, but not really...

LVNHACK
11-04-2012, 09:23 PM
So some ROEs say that when you are being fired upon with RPGs, mortars and guns, that you are not allowed to shoot a gun a the bad guys? Sorry, I have a real hard time believing that.


Well believe this, a shoulder fired weapon in a defensive position isn't going to much good on a mortar due to stand off range. And no matter what the ROE's were, it still doesn't explain the lack of action inregards to any relief efforts.

The_Grand_Illusion
11-05-2012, 09:29 AM
It's good that CBS News is finally coming clean with their bias but it's probably too little, too late. Like I said earlier, regardless of who wins, Benghazi-gate is not going to go away.


http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2012/11/05/what-president-obama-really-said-60-minutes-interview-about-benghazi/


What President Obama really said in that '60 Minutes' interview about Benghazi

by Bret Baier | November 05, 2012


ANALYSIS: Two days before the election, CBS posted additional portions of a Sept. 12 "60 Minutes" interview where President Obama seems to contradict himself on the Benghazi attack. As the Benghazi investigation gets more attention and focus, CBS is once again adding to the Benghazi timeline.

In the interview, according to the latest portions, Obama would not say whether he thought the attack was terrorism. Yet he would later emphasize at a presidential debate that in the Rose Garden the same day, he had declared the attack an act of terror.

That moment was one of the most intense exchanges in the second presidential debate. Romney was on the offensive on what conservatives believed was a serious vulnerability of Obama -- the handling of the Benghazi attack and what he called it from the beginning.

The town hall questioner asked, "Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?"

Obama did not provide a direct answer, but said: "When I say that we are going to find out exactly what happened, everybody will be held accountable, and I am ultimately responsible for what's taking place there, because these are my folks, and I'm the one who has to greet those coffins when they come home, you know that I mean what I say."

Romney pounced, saying, "There were many days that passed before we knew whether this was a spontaneous demonstration or actually whether it was a terrorist attack. And there was no demonstration involved. It was a terrorist attack, and it took a long time for that to be told to the American people."

On rebuttal, Obama seemed rehearsed, but indignant. "The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror... And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That's not what we do. That's not what I do as president. That's not what I do as commander in chief."

Governor Romney walked forward and started questioning ...

ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration.

OBAMA: Please proceed.

ROMNEY: Is that what you're saying?

OBAMA: Please proceed, Governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CROWLEY: It -- he did in fact, sir. So let me -- let me call it an act of terrorism -- (inaudible) --

OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? (Laughter, applause.)

CROWLEY: He did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea of there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.

ROMNEY: This -- the administration -- the administration -- (applause) -- indicated that this was a -- a reaction to a -- to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.

CROWLEY: They did.

ROMNEY: It took them a long time to say this was a terrorist act by a terrorist group and -- and to suggest -- am I incorrect in that regard? On Sunday the -- your -- your secretary or --

Obama -- who had clearly won the moment (largely thanks to Candy Crowley) -- clearly wanted to move on from that victorious moment -- and quickly.

OBAMA: Candy --

ROMNEY: Excuse me. The ambassador to the United Nations went on the Sunday television shows and -- and spoke about how this was a spontaneous reaction.

OBAMA: Candy, I'm -- I'm happy to --

CROWLEY: President, let me -- I --

OBAMA: I'm happy to have a longer conversation about foreign policy.

CROWLEY: I know you -- absolutely. But I want -- I want to move you on.

OBAMA: OK, I'm happy to do that too.

CROWLEY: And also, people can go to the transcripts and --

OBAMA:I just want to make sure that --

CROWLEY: -- figure out what was said and when.

OBAMA:-- you know, all these wonderful folks are going to have a chance to get some -- their questions answered.

Now, we may know why. Soon after that debate exchange, CBS released a previously unseen clip of an interview "60 Minutes'" Steve Kroft did with Obama on Sept. 12 -- the day after the Benghazi attack.

The clip added to the previous sound that had been released and seemed to back up the president's claim that he was referring to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist act in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12. Here's what CBS put out Oct. 19, five weeks after the attack.

KROFT: But there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades, that doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.

OBAMA: As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened, I don’t want to jump the gun on this. But your right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt. And my suspicion is there are folks involved in this. Who were looking to target Americans from the start. So we’re gonna make sure that our first priority is to get our folks out safe, make sure our embassies are secured around the world and then we are going to go after those folks who carried this out."

After the second debate back and forth, this seemed to back up the president's stance. The only problem? Kroft started his question with "but."

I always thought, it seems that he's following up on a question -- I wonder if there was a question before that question?

This week, we got the CIA timeline of events in which they detail all of the response of the CIA and what they put up the chain of command in the minutes and hours after the attack began. Of all the details of the specific times the CIA contractors respond to the fight, I found this one most interesting:

"1:15 a.m.: CIA reinforcements arrive on a 45-minute flight from Tripoli in a plane they've hastily chartered. The Tripoli team includes four GRS security officers, a CIA case officer and two U.S. military personnel who are on loan to the agency. They don't leave Benghazi airport until 4:30. The delay is caused by negotiations with Libyan authorities over permission to leave the airport, obtaining vehicles, and the need to frame a clear mission plan. The first idea is to go to a Benghazi hospital to recover Stevens, who they correctly suspect is already dead. But the hospital is surrounded by the Al Qaeda-linked Ansar al-Shariah militia that mounted the consulate attack."

So the U.S. Ambassador to Libya is at the Benghazi hospital and suspected dead. The CIA contractors know that, but they can't get there because the hospital is surrounded by the Al Qaeda-linked group Ansar al Shariah, the "militia that mounted the consulate attack."

This goes up the chain communication at 1:15 a.m. on Sept. 12. The White House, the Situation Room, and all of those paying attention to intel channels know that the guys on the ground have determined the group that's behind this. It's the Al Qaeda-linked militia that are still fighting and have the hospital surrounded.

About 12 hours later -- before heading to Las Vegas for a campaign event -- Obama sits down for that "60 Minutes" interview with Steve Kroft.

And Sunday night, 54 days after the attack and almost two weeks after putting out the first additional clip that appeared to back up the president after the second debate, CBS without fanfare posted the rest of the Benghazi question online -- the question before the question.

Remember this is from a president who has been saying he was calling Benghazi a terrorist attack from the very first moment in the Rose Garden. Also, remember what he said in the debate and notice the new part -- underlined in bold.

Click here to see the "60 Minutes" interview.

KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?

OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.

KROFT: It’s been described as a mob action, but there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades, that doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.

OBAMA: As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened, I don’t want to jump the gun on this. But your right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt. And my suspicion is there are folks involved in this. Who were looking to target Americans from the start. So we’re gonna make sure that our first priority is to get our folks out safe, make sure our embassies are secured around the world and then we are going to go after those folks who carried this out.

KROFT: There have been reports, obviously this isn’t the first time…there have been attacks on the consulate before. There was an attack against the British ambassador. Do you…this occurred on Sept. 11. Can you tell me why the ambassador was in Benghazi yesterday? Was it to evaluate security at the consulate?

OBAMA: Well keep in mind Chris Stevens is somebody that was one of the first Americans on the ground when we were in the process of saving Benghazi and providing the opportunity for Libyans to create their own democracy. So this is somebody who had been courageous, had been on the ground, had helped to advise me and Secretary Clinton when we were taking our actions against Muammar Qaddafi. And is somebody who is very familiar with the train. He was doing the work that he does as a diplomat helping to shape our policies in the region at a time when things are still fairly fragile. But I think it’s important to note that we have a Libyan government in place that is fully cooperative, that sees the United States as a friend that recognizes we played an important role in liberating Libya and providing the Libyan people an opportunity to forge their own destiny. And in fact we had Libyans who helped protect our diplomats when they were under attack. But this is a country that is still rebuilding in the aftermath of Qaddafi. They don’t necessarily always have the same capabilities that countries with more established governments might have in helping to provide protection to our folks. But beyond that, what I want to do is make sure that we know exactly what happened, how it happened, who perpetrated this action, then we’ll act accordingly."

These are two crucial answers in the big picture. Right after getting out of the Rose Garden, where, according to the second debate and other accounts he definitively called the attack terrorism, Obama is asked point blank about not calling it terrorism. He blinks and does not push back.

Understand that this interview is just hours after he gets out of the Rose Garden.

How after this exchange and the CIA explanation of what was being put up the chain in the intel channels does the Ambassador to the United Nations go on the Sunday shows and say what she says about a spontaneous demonstration sparked by that anti-Islam video? And how does the president deliver a speech to the United Nations 13 days later where he references that anti-Islam video six times when referring to the attack in Benghazi?

There are many questions, and here are a few more.

Why did CBS release a clip that appeared to back up Obama's claim in the second debate on Oct. 19, a few days before the foreign policy debate, and not release the rest of that interview at the beginning?

Why on the Sunday before the election, almost six weeks after the attack, at 6 p.m. does an obscure online timeline posted on CBS.com contain the additional "60 Minutes" interview material from Sept. 12?

Why wasn't it news after the president said what he said in the second debate, knowing what they had in that "60 Minutes" tape -- why didn't they use it then? And why is it taking Fox News to spur other media organizations to take the Benghazi story seriously?

Whatever your politics, there are a lot of loose ends here, a lot of unanswered questions and a lot of strange political maneuvers that don't add up.

That's what reporters should live for, but this time they're not. We will.